RFR (L) 8199263: Split interfaceSupport.hpp to not require including .inline.hpp files

[coleen.phillimore at oracle.com]

I had to include and out-line some functions that create Handles, where 
handles.inline.hpp is not transitively included via interfaceSupport.hpp 
anymore.  Thanks to Stefan for finding these for me.

This is the incremental webrev:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8199263.03.incr/webrev/index.html

And full webrev:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8199263.03/webrev/index.html

This passes mach5 tier1 on Oracle platforms.

Thanks,
Coleen

On 3/14/18 8:48 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>
> Hi, this is broken with the inline Handle constructor, so please 
> disregard for now.  I have to add more handles.inline.hpp includes 
> since they're not transitively included by interfaceSupport.hpp.
> thanks,
> Coleen
>
> On 3/13/18 9:01 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>> Sorry, this is the correct webrev:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~coleenp/8199263.02/webrev/index.html
>>
>> Coleen
>>
>> On 3/13/18 7:50 AM, coleen.phillimore at oracle.com wrote:
>>> Summary: interfaceSupport.hpp is an inline file so moved to 
>>> interfaceSupport.inline.hpp and stopped including it in .hpp files
>>>
>>> 90% of this change is renaming interfaceSupport.hpp to 
>>> interfaceSupport.inline.hpp.   I tried to see if all of these files 
>>> needed this header and the answer was yes.   A surprising (to me!) 
>>> number of files have thread state transitions.
>>> Some of interesting part of this change is adding 
>>> ciUtilities.inline.hpp to include interfaceSupport.inline.hpp for 
>>> VM_ENTRY.  whitebox.inline.hpp was added for the same reason.
>>> jvmtiEnter.hpp was renamed jvmtiEnter.inline.hpp because it includes 
>>> interfaceSupport.inline.hpp, and is only included in cpp files.
>>> The rest of the changes were to add back includes that are not 
>>> pulled in by header files including interfaceSupport.hpp, like 
>>> gcLocker.hpp and of course handles.inline.hpp.
>>>
>>> This probably overlaps some of Volker's patch.  Can this be tested 
>>> on other platforms that we don't have?
>>>
>>> Hopefully, at the end of all this we have more clean header files so 
>>> that transitive includes don't make the jvm build on one platform 
>>> but not the next.  I think that's the goal of all of this work.
>>>
>>> This was tested with Oracle platforms (linux-x64, solaris-sparcv9, 
>>> macosx-x64, windows-x64) in the mach5 tier1 and 2.   I built this 
>>> locally without precompiled headers (my default setting of course) 
>>> on linux-x64.
>>>
>>> bug link https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8199263
>>> local webrev at 
>>> http://oklahoma.us.oracle.com/~cphillim/webrev/8199263.02/webrev
>>>
>>> Thanks to Stefan for his help with this.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Coleen
>>>
>>>
>>
>